Given the multiple lines of debate; B-17 Vs Lancaster Vs Mossy, I post the following question;
To convert the B-17 from a day bomber into a night/streak bomber, remove the top, bottom and chin turrets, remove the waist and cheek guns and gunners, relocate the flight deck to just behind the bombadier's space so that there is onlythree or four crew! Install large spinners on the props and install a single 20 mm auto-cannon on a flexible "X" bow mount in the plexi nose. Reduction in frontal area, weight and increases in streamlinning make flight both much faster and much more efficient!
Since there is room for four 4,000 pound MC bombs in the bomb bay, the shakles should be modified to hold those four heavy bombs if the larger shakle does not fit now. Otherwise eight 2,000 pound bombs should be the standard load. Given the 210-220 knot cruising speed of the Mossy required to make the placard range, the new faster B-17N/S should offer more of everything that makes the Mossy so neat?

Given the multiple lines of debate; B-17 Vs Lancaster Vs Mossy, I post the following question; To convert the B-17 from a day bomber into a night/streak bomber, remove the top, bottom and chin turrets, remove the waist and cheek guns and gunners, relocate the flight deck to just behind the bombadier's space so that there is onlythree or four crew! Install large spinners on the props and install a single 20 mm auto-cannon on a flexible "X" bow mount in the plexi nose. they tried this the plexiglas was too weak to take a .5 let alone a 20mm, the other guns could be removed as they were pretty useless anyway

Reduction in frontal area, weight and increases in streamlinning make flight both much faster and much more efficient!

yes it would, not sure how much though, a B17E with 4x alison 1700hp liquid cooled turbocharged engines was no faster than the same model with 4x1200hp p&w

Since there is room for four 4,000 pound MC bombs in the bomb bay,

sorry missed you increasing the bomb bay size as a B17 wouldnt accomodate a single 4000lbs let alone 4

the shakles should be modified to hold those four heavy bombs if the larger shakle does not fit now.

shackles are irrelavent as the bombs would nt fit

Otherwise eight 2,000 pound bombs should be the standard load.

not possible in a B17 bay 2 x 2000lbs it could carry would still be pretty useless (unless you are including a SECOND bomb bay in which case you could increase it to 4x 2000lbs but would require virtually a new plane)

Given the 210-220 knot cruising speed of the Mossy required to make the placard range,

Not proven and 265 cruise vs 380 max means that the New B17 would need to gain a big chunk of performance, and it would still be a huge plane for such a small amount of bombs, it certainly

the new faster B-17N/S should offer more of everything that makes the Mossy so neat?

yes but it wasnt built the mossy was, by the time you had done these changes you had the B29 anyway, and such a bomber would not do the main job of the B17 that of fighter bait

Given the multiple lines of debate; B-17 Vs Lancaster Vs Mossy, I post the following question; To convert the B-17 from a day bomber into a night/streak bomber, remove the top, bottom and chin turrets, remove the waist and cheek guns and gunners, relocate the flight deck to just behind the bombadier's space so that there is onlythree or four crew! Install large spinners on the props and install a single 20 mm auto-cannon on a flexible "X" bow mount in the plexi nose. they tried this the plexiglas was too weak to take a .5 let alone a 20mm, the other guns could be removed as they were pretty useless anyway

You failed to note the "X" Braced Bow mount in yellow above?

Reduction in frontal area, weight and increases in streamlinning make flight both much faster and much more efficient!

yes it would, not sure how much though, a B17E with 4x alison 1700hp liquid cooled turbocharged engines was no faster than the same model with 4x1200hp p&w So the Alison V-1710 now makes 1,700 HP? Right! How about 1310 HP? How about the drag reductions and slightly increased power making it a 327 MPH plane? So you think it was no faster than the standard version?

Since there is room for four 4,000 pound MC bombs in the bomb bay,

sorry missed you increasing the bomb bay size as a B17 wouldnt accomodate a single 4000lbs let alone 4 No changes in dimentions, the bombs could fit as the bay was more than wide enough to carry those bombs and tall enough to carry two, one above the other, for four total. All that would be required is the stronger rack.

the shakles should be modified to hold those four heavy bombs if the larger shakle does not fit now.

shackles are irrelavent as the bombs would nt fit Given the bays are slightly more than eight foot wide and more than seven feet tall, why on Earth would you think a bomb only 34" in diameter would not fit?

Otherwise eight 2,000 pound bombs should be the standard load.

not possible in a B17 bay 2 x 2000lbs it could carry would still be pretty useless (unless you are including a SECOND bomb bay in which case you could increase it to 4x 2000lbs but would require virtually a new plane)Given the bays are slightly more than eight foot wide and more than seven feet tall, why on Earth would you think a bomb only 34" in diameter would not fit?

Given the 210-220 knot cruising speed of the Mossy required to make the placard range,

Not proven and 265 cruise vs 380 max means that the New B17 would need to gain a big chunk of performance, and it would still be a huge plane for such a small amount of bombs, it certainly From the Mossy manual you posted! Page 32 clearly shows that to have the range I quoted, IE 1,500 miles round trip, you have to fly at 210 Knots! So no, it can not fly 2,700 miles at any speed and certainly not as far as 1,500 miles if they are going faster than 210 Knots! While the Mossy certainly could cruise at 265 or even faster, it can only do that is it goes a much shorter distance as shown by those same charts in that same manual!

the new faster B-17N/S should offer more of everything that makes the Mossy so neat?

yes but it wasnt built the mossy was,

This entire thread is a what if discussion, like "should the Mossy have replaced the Lanc and other heavy four engined bombers in the RAF-BC"?

they tried this the plexiglas was too weak to take a .5 let alone a 20mm, the other guns could be removed as they were pretty useless anyway

You failed to note the "X" Braced Bow mount in yellow above?And as I said it was tried and it FAILED what bit of that did you not understand? yes you can fit one but you end up with a amlost soild nose (see coastal command B17s)

Reduction in frontal area, weight and increases in streamlinning make flight both much faster and much more efficient!

yes it would, not sure how much though, a B17E with 4x alison 1700hp liquid cooled turbocharged engines was no faster than the same model with 4x1200hp p&w So the Alison V-1710 now makes 1,700 HP? Right! How about 1310 HP?

er no, the aircraft was fitted with 1700hp alisons according to Boeing

How about the drag reductions and slightly increased power making it a 327 MPH plane? So you think it was no faster than the standard version?

er no, flight tests show that despite the increase in power and drag reduction of the inline engines the top speed was pretty much the same (within normal tollereance for that model), life does not always work the same as it does on paper

Since there is room for four 4,000 pound MC bombs in the bomb bay,

sorry missed you increasing the bomb bay size as a B17 wouldnt accomodate a single 4000lbs let alone 4 No changes in dimentions, the bombs could fit as the bay was more than wide enough to carry those bombs and tall enough to carry two, one above the other, for four total. All that would be required is the stronger rack.

NO the B17 bomb bay was incablable of carrying any 4000lbs bomb you have been shown this many times yet persist in claiming otherwise, either you are stupid, unable to understand simple facts or a liar

the shakles should be modified to hold those four heavy bombs if the larger shakle does not fit now.

shackles are irrelavent as the bombs would nt fit Given the bays are slightly more than eight foot wide and more than seven feet tall, why on Earth would you think a bomb only 34" in diameter would not fit?

why I think that only 2x 2000lbs would fit maybe thats because only 2x2000lbs WOULD FIT unless you remove the central spine (which was structual) then you may have the facility to carry a different load but as this would require major changes you would have virtually a new bomber with B17 wings

Otherwise eight 2,000 pound bombs should be the standard load.

not possible in a B17 bay 2 x 2000lbs it could carry would still be pretty useless (unless you are including a SECOND bomb bay in which case you could increase it to 4x 2000lbs but would require virtually a new plane) Given the bays are slightly more than eight foot wide and more than seven feet tall, why on Earth would you think a bomb only 34" in diameter would not fit?

repeating it will not make it so, no B17 could ever carry more than 2x2000lbs internally that is the bottom line, it was incapable of carrying a 4000lbs without serious modifications, and dont forget that your modifications is reducing the height of the bay therefore reducing the amount of smaller bombs it could carry

the new faster B-17N/S should offer more of everything that makes the Mossy so neat?

except size, compaid to a mossie it will still be a huge beast of a plane

This entire thread is a what if discussion, like "should the Mossy have replaced the Lanc and other heavy four engined bombers in the RAF-BC"?

problem is you havent started with existing plane like the argument about the mossie did, IIRC there was a paper project for a 4 engined mossie but no one is propsing that one are they! not only that you have not supported any of your claims and you have made some that are patently wrong

And as I said it was tried and it FAILED what bit of that did you not understand? yes you can fit one but you end up with a amlost soild nose (see coastal command B17s)NO, an auxilery X brace was never tried! Please post link to source for this claim!

Reduction in frontal area, weight and increases in streamlinning make flight both much faster and much more efficient!

yes it would, not sure how much though, a B17E with 4x alison 1700hp liquid cooled turbocharged engines was no faster than the same model with 4x1200hp p&wSo the Alison V-1710 now makes 1,700 HP? Right! How about 1310 HP?er no, the aircraft was fitted with 1700hp alisons according to Boeing So you take the 60 years post war plackard in leu of the published at the time facts, like no Alison not in a fighter plane made more than 1,425 HP during the war? No, it is 1,310 HP acording to published claims by Boeing durring the war.

How about the drag reductions and slightly increased power making it a 327 MPH plane? So you think it was no faster than the standard version?

er no, flight tests show that despite the increase in power and drag reduction of the inline engines the top speed was pretty much the same (within normal tollereance for that model), life does not always work the same as it does on paperI guess that you define "pretty much the same" as 327 MPH is "pretty much the same" as 317 MPH?

NO the B17 bomb bay was incablable of carrying any 4000lbs bomb you have been shown this many times yet persist in claiming otherwise, either you are stupid, unable to understand simple facts or a liar No, no one has ever shown that the bomb bay was too narrow to take the 4,000 pound medium case bomb, or not tall enough to prevent TWO of them in the more than 7' of hight in the short, but wide and tall bomb bay!

the shakles should be modified to hold those four heavy bombs if the larger shakle does not fit now.

shackles are irrelavent as the bombs would nt fit Given the bays are slightly more than eight foot wide and more than seven feet tall, why on Earth would you think a bomb only 34" in diameter would not fit?

why I think that only 2x 2000lbs would fit maybe thats because only 2x2000lbs WOULD FIT unless you remove the central spine (which was structual) Not true at all! The central spine is only 6" wide at the bottom and 14" wide at the top! then you may have the facility to carry a different load but as this would require major changes you would have virtually a new bomber with B17 wings

---

Otherwise eight 2,000 pound bombs should be the standard load.

Given the bays are slightly more than eight foot wide and more than seven feet tall, why on Earth would you think a bomb only 34" in diameter would not fit?

repeating it will not make it so, no B17 could ever carry more than 2x2000lbs internally that is the bottom line, it was incapable of carrying a 4000lbs without serious modifications, and dont forget that your modifications is reducing the height of the bay therefore reducing the amount of smaller bombs it could carry

So a seven foot tall bomb bay 3.75' wide at the bottom and 2.9' wide two feet from the top will not fit eight bombs less than 23" in diamiter, four on each side, two on the center rack/walk way and two on each side of the bay? RIGHT!http://www.eugeneleeslover.com...

the new faster B-17N/S should offer more of everything that makes the Mossy so neat?

except size, compaid to a mossie it will still be a huge beast of a plane Yes, very true! More room for Avionics, Navaids and room to walk around!

See the link posted to find the bomb size and then imagine it in the bomb bay, or better yet, cut and paste the correct sizes bomb's silhouette in to the cross section of the bomb bay!